]]>By: SPQR (768505)http://patterico.com/2012/11/09/petraeus-resigns-will-not-testify-or-so-the-democrats-think/#comment-1109307
Mon, 12 Nov 2012 16:41:31 +0000http://patterico.com/?p=71153#comment-1109307Finkleman, your comment makes no sense at all. There are plenty of speculative theories about why Obama would delay firing Petraeus until after the election and plenty of theories about why it was to his advantage to use the threat of exposure or the actual exposure to discredit Petraeus’ account of Benghazi.

Your offhand rejection of any such with the naive acceptance of the idea that Obama knew nothing of the investigation until after the election strains all credibility.

In the second place, he doesn’t need to. A president has a right to fire the CIA Director any time (Gerald Ford did) and right now woud be a perfectly plauasible timeto do so without offering any explanation. He could also offer a ton of simpler explanations and doesn’t need to d all this. Unlike President Clinton with the FBI Director, he doesn’t legally need to have “cause” to fire him.

Somebody at lower rank, or a cabal, would have a need to cook this whole thing up.

Barack Obama is the only person in the U,S, government who had no motive to create this scandal.